Jump to content

2018 Rolex Sydney Hobart Yacht Race: The Race Committee has lodged a protest against Wild Oats XI


Recommended Posts

12 minutes ago, HILLY said:
Not a WOXI / M.R. sychophant or fan boy, just want to see if you have the balls to back up your online anonymous bravado.
Added bonus, RSPCA gets to find out who is killing kangaroos with fence palings. YCMTSU!!

Thanks for the infor Hilly, that's awesome mate, if only everyone else here was as helpful as you it would be a much better place!

But help me out here, are you saying that it is up to me to do something about it and not Richo? 

Hahahhaahaa. The roo had no rights after colliding with the front of my car, clear port and starboard, I was going to use Rule .303 or 22 but didn't have the equipment.  Had to resort to Rule 3 x 4.   He objected, counter protested but lost.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 4.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

In loving memory of Clark and Daw We welcome this evening Mr Richard the skipper of the winning power boat. Hello Brian. Mr Richard, may we call you Dick? Sure Brian, most

If Matt Allen as President of AS has any balls he should put Harburg/Bradford and Oatley/Richards in a room and read them the riot act. Harburg for not protesting but having a cry on national TV and O

Ok I am now caught up on this thread. Yes I went live - first actually - with the news direct from Shipwright Arms where WOXI were having lunch in one room, and BJ in the other. Was the best place to

Posted Images

5 minutes ago, Extra Cheese said:

Yes, perhaps the Jury should disregard the World Sailing guidance and also case 138 and listen to you, or perhaps they should do what they are trained to do and experienced in, which is to follow the rules. 

Yes it is clear that the IJ followed the rules, good job guys.

But WOXI admitted to breaking the rules.

The really really sad detail is that RIcho tried the "yes but we didn't mean to do it sir, it wasn't our fault!" line.  I mean really?  WTF!

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Mid said:

you know as well as i do that it's somewhere in the transom , no way a quick easy job  

Splitter at the transom? It is within a bees dick of the AIS which is behind Nav station panel then going forward to the mast and masthead mounted VHF antenna as per Special Regs. The only thing going to the transom is a loose cable from splitter for utilisation of an emergency VHF antenna in case the rig says goodbye.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, random said:

Thanks for the infor Hilly, that's awesome mate, if only everyone else here was as helpful as you it would be a much better place!

But help me out here, are you saying that it is up to me to do something about it and not Richo? 

Hahahhaahaa. The roo had no rights after colliding with the front of my car, clear port and starboard, I was going to use Rule .303 or 22 but didn't have the equipment.  Had to resort to Rule 3 x 4.   He objected, counter protested but lost.

Of course it's up to you.

Just as M.R. is captain of WOXI, you are captain of the good ship Pitchforks on Parade.

You also seem, by your constant anonomyous whinging, to be the person who has been the worst done, out of this whole shemozzle, you've probably used up a whole dole cheque worth of bunched up, LANDT filled disposable adult diapers since boxing day, so unfair, being an aggrevied superstar of sailing (r.c. div), doesn't come cheap.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, random said:

Thanks for the infor Hilly, that's awesome mate, if only everyone else here was as helpful as you it would be a much better place!

More helpful than that would be you being run over by a bus. Singlehanded you have turned what should be an informative thread into a whinging fuckfest. 

Look here comes the 181 Express....remember one foot after the other.

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

Mate great race by the way. Had you #12 on Tatts at one stage.

As for your suggestion Cooney is in the same position after last year now looking at his Rolex. You might need to catch up with Richards mea culpa that took 12 months to admit to.

"At least last year we cocked up. We made the wrong decision not doing our [alternative penalty] turns. Comanche notified the Race Committee on the radio that they were protesting . We got to Hobart, we went over to congratulate Jim Cooney [Comanche owner] and he said straight away "we're protesting you".

"My response was "fair enough, that's yacht racing." The protest was properly held. We were penalised like we should have been. It was the right result, and I don't have any bad feelings about last year's race. We sailed a brilliant race. But we stuffed it up and paid the price [of a line honours win and an unlikely to be beaten race record]."

Does this mean we have to wait 12 months for Richards to fess up to this race just finished?

https://www.sail-world.com/news/213456/

I was just stirring Shang up mate!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

Happy New Year LB, great that you have joined in.

Now tell me, what rule did the RC break?

Standing by on channel 16

And to you mate! Sorry I haven’t been contributing much but with these light easterlys and perfect weather, we have been stuck at anchor in Lucinda Bay for the past 9 days. It has been hell with very poor phone coverage. Instead of googling information about AIS and RRS and arguing about a race I didn’t do, we have had to resort to SUPing, swimming and catching up for beers with old friends. The only consolation has being breaking the national park rules by having a bonfire on the beach each night, walking the dog and drinking piss on the beach. I was going to report myself to the brown shirts (park rangers) and retire from the holiday but like the great MR, I am a true anarchist at heart. But you and JS have been doing great work your ‘the people VS Wild Oats XI’ campaign but the sad fact remains that Mark Richards has 9 line honours trophys and all you have is writers cramp and a throbbing vein in your forehead. Bit rainy today so The bride and I are heading over to my mates 70 foot power cat for lunch. With a bit of luck the rain will clear this afternoon so we can take to dog ashore for another dump in the national park. Might even take one myself just for fun. I will admit I have turned my AIS off because I don’t want my staff to know where I am.

Over.

Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, frant said:

i said in an earlier post that the IJ had handed WOXI a poisoned challice  by disallowing the protest. Seems like a few have had to drink from that vessel.

More like "mana from heaven" coming from the RC by it lodging a protest knowing full well the IJ had no option but to declare it invalid.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, HILLY said:

You also seem, by your constant anonomyous whinging, to be the person who has been the worst done, out of this whole shemozzle, you've probably used up a whole dole cheque worth of bunched up, LANDT filled disposable adult diapers since boxing day, so unfair, being an aggrevied superstar of sailing (r.c. div), doesn't come cheap.

Thanks for your concern Hilly, you seem like a nice bloke.

And yes I have been fucking devastated by this outcome and the harm it has done to the sport I love.  I have been losing sleep, my appetite is shit and I just adjusted my belt a notch in and this morning my dog came over and rested it's head on my lap, worried about me.  It's horrible.

I really appreciate your concern, but I'm still not sure how this will end up, I mean who would have ever thought that one of the most prized trophies in world sailing would be awarded to a boat that admitted they did not comply with the Rules?  Then goes on to form a conga line of transgressions that in any other arena would have landed them in Rule 69 soup?

Sad, very sad time for sailing.

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, random said:

my dog came over and rested it's head on my lap, 

Tell your dog mine says hi from a national park.

Fuck she loves this place.

CFD51C2F-CDCD-4621-852C-149D596B1F42.jpeg

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mid said:

world record time to fit a new splitter :rolleyes:

Do we know that they installed new parts?  I am betting that they shut all that stuff down when they finish the race and tie the boat up to a dock.  It doesn't take long at all to run back down stairs (maybe when you heard that it was not working) and turn it on again - effectively completing the "Cold Boot".  But yes world's record for a re and re of the Splitter while everyone on the boat is hosing champagne! 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, random said:

Thanks for your concern Hilly, you seem like a nice bloke.

And yes I have been fucking devastated by this outcome and the harm it has done to the sport I love.  I have been losing sleep, my appetite is shit and I just adjusted my belt a notch in and this morning my dog came over and rested it's head on my lap, worried about me.  It's horrible.

I really appreciate your concern, but I'm still not sure how this will end up, I mean who would have ever thought that one of the most prized trophies in world sailing would be awarded to a boat that admitted they did not comply with the Rules?  Then goes on to form a conga line of transgressions that in any other arena would have landed them in Rule 69 soup?

Sad, very sad time for sailing.

The Illingworth trophy, has been sadly denigrated over the years, and is only a reality for a small percentage of the fleet any given year. At least they didn't win the Tattersalls trophy, a true representation of who were the best sailors that year.

I would like to suggest that the 100'ers start 1/2 an hour earlier, have only one rule, Port / Starboard, and go hell for leather at each other in the time it takes to eat 2 lunches, 1 dinner, and maybe a light breakfast, all while pushing buttons to make the fuckers go. (except for bowcrew, they earn their meals!).

This will give the choppers time to come back and cover the start of the real race.

If you play this sport long enough, (40 odd years), you will come to realise that certain clubs, officials, seem to favour particular boats / persons. 

I'm still involved because its been  a lifelong passion, and there are still fantastic people in all facets of the sport, you may not know who you are, but Thanks anyway.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Tell your dog mine says hi from a national park.

Fuck she loves this place.

CFD51C2F-CDCD-4621-852C-149D596B1F42.jpeg

I follow John Rooth’s advice (4x4 guy) re dogs in national sparks & wildfires areas “Sorry ranger but the dog can’t read signs, it’s a dog”

Firstly the land belongs to the public not the government, secondly when did we vote for these rules? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Tell your dog mine says hi from a national park.

Fuck she loves this place.

CFD51C2F-CDCD-4621-852C-149D596B1F42.jpeg

 

25 minutes ago, random said:

Nice dog.  Dingo bait.

 

7 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

I follow John Rooth’s advice (4x4 guy) re dogs in national sparks & wildfires areas “Sorry ranger but the dog can’t read signs, it’s a dog”

Firstly the land belongs to the public not the government, secondly when did we vote for these rules? 

 

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?/topic/206158-why-dogs-banned-from-national-parks/

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, SCANAS said:

I follow John Rooth’s advice (4x4 guy) re dogs in national sparks & wildfires areas “Sorry ranger but the dog can’t read signs, it’s a dog”

Firstly the land belongs to the public not the government, secondly when did we vote for these rules? 

Happy new year mate and well done. How was the QLD?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Quote

 

There are three basic rules that should always be remembered when positioning antennae and cables:

  1. Mount the VHF & GPS antennas as high as possible on the mast / superstructure of the vessel.
  2. Make sure the UAIS antennas are not in the same horizontal plane as the marine DSC VHF and / or RADAR transmission lobes.
  3. Make sure the RF cables running to the UAIS transponder do not run parallel to any high power transmission line within the vessel. Also, the cables should be installed in a straight line and there should be no loops in the cable run.

 

https://www.marinetraffic.com/blog/investigating-with-ais-data/

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, axolotl said:

I find your "you are too dumb to understand this stuff" attitude offensive.  I think you're searching for "what if" scenarios, where the reality is TV helicopters are harmless and don't "fry"  AIS Class B devices or their antenna splitters in the real world 99.99% of the time 

Sorry, I was not referring to you. Mostly I was complaining about the incessant "if the TV link caused problems this time, why didn't it cause problems every other time and to every other boat" argument.  I'm sorry I ever posted. So this is my last post on the subject.

What I was doing was applying what is essentially a back of the envelope fault tree analysis to the claim of what happened. Given the preconditions - TV downlink activated, followed by system resets and failures aboard WOXI, is there a mechanism by which AIS transmit could fail and leave VHF and AIS receive working? And my answer is - yes there is. I've explained what the mechanism is, and noted that it is unusual, and not expected. But it is quite plausible. 

I'm not going to give a tutorial in fault tree analysis, but to explain a little deeper. 

The expression "fried" is unfortunate. I very much doubt the AIS splitter was physically damaged. It is possible, but very unlikely. A lot of the arguments are taking fried to mean physical damage. Often in my area "fried" is used to mean "its brain is fried" or similar, which means it has crashed or gone into an illegal state. Given the mostly likely implementation of the internals of the splitter will involve some hard wired logic, possibly using a tiny PLC, a latch up into an illegal state is quite plausible. 

Given the requirements of how the splitter operates, is there a state it could get into whereby the AIS transmit is incorrectly disabled? Again the answer is yes. The splitter has a designed in function that disables AIS transmission whenever the VHF transmits. This is key. 

Given the presence of this function, is there a mechanism by which it could be activated incorrectly? Again, the answer is yes. If one of the switching elements (ie a relay) was stuck in the wrong state, a sneak path could be caused that routed the AIS transmission to the detection circuit that is used to detect VHF transmission. Every time the AIS transmitted, the splitter would think it was the VHF transmitting, and switch it out, disabling transmit. Once the AIS transmitter finished, the splitter would release the disable, and reception of AIS is restored.

Is there a scenario whereby the splitter's internal control logic could get into such a latched up state? Yes. The boat was illuminated by the microwave link from the helo, and systems aboard failed. Given other systems were electrically affected to the point of erroneous operation, there were conditions aboard that could have affected the AIS splitter and driven it into a bad state. (And it is here that experience with a mix of RF and logic helps. As I wrote earlier, this is the sort of problem that keeps safety critical designers awake at night. The microwave energy only needs to propagate energy enough to get to a few volts inside a device to cause chaos. You don't need any power dissipated. Microwaves are fickle and very difficult to predict. As the microwave designers like to joke - "if it will go down a wire, it is DC.")

And that is it. The LED status lights would have indicated VHF transmission every time the AIS tried to transmit, and the AIS light may or may not have lit. You would have to have a clear understanding of the light's meaning to realise there was a problem, and given the unit was almost certainly buried out of sight, no-one would be able to observe them anyway.

Assuming no permanent damage, a power reset would have almost certainly cleared the erroronious state. If that was done shortly after the boat docked, it would have restored AIS function.

Thus the explanation is plausible

Do I think this is the real explanation?  On the balance of probabilities - not really. I generally subscribe to fuckup theories. Someone accidentally turning it off, and when they went down to check everything, realised their mistake and turning it back on. The diable switch is probably some nondescript thing tucked out of general view, and it either got bumped or a mistake was made, and then forgotten. OTOH, not all systems need a physical disable switch. An integrated single vendor system can supply the disable function via a MFD. I looked at the Raymarine system, and there is a slightly ridiculous set of conflicts, where the physical switch overrides the MFD command to enable the AIS TX. 

And to finish. This isn't the issue

We have seen bad behaviour from all concerned. This behaviour has nothing to do with any technical arguments, and continued carping on the nature of explanations for the lack of AIS utterly misses the important point.

WOXI, BJ, and the RC should all hang their heads. There has been dickish behaviour of different kinds from all three. We are not going to see any further action on this. That is just a sad reality. We might all learn from this. And one lesson is that not protesting because you think protesting is the "wrong thing" is not helpful. Not protesting and then letting everyone know you think the winner cheated and their win is unsportsmanlike is unsporting in its own right, and deserving of censure. I can't imagine anyone here would be happy if they won a race or series, and the second place getter was telling everyone he could in the bar after that they saw you hit a mark in a critical race and you didn't take your turns, but "he didn't do protests".  Heck, if you want a rule 69, that sort of thing is closer to the mark. MR has not been graceful either, and deserves calling out as well.

EOT.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Glenn McCarthy said:

5 International Judges have ruled. End of case.

This is more like Political Anarchy, I'm out of this thread.  Adios.

So Glen your packing up your panties and getting out of Dodge after explaining very well what most here knew and accepted last Saturday, and if they didn't, no longer have an excuse, unless you answer to Random. That is the IJ had no option but to declare the RC's protest "invalid" and BJ by not protesting allowed that to occur.

However you make no attempt as a contributing rule maker to buy into the debate as to how a "self policing" sport is in fact not "self policing" when the definition of "self" is restricted to other competitors, not the party who is potentially at fault.

This onus falling on other competitors where the RC is a spectator provides fertile ground for "cheating". By saying that I'm not suggesting WOXI cheated, only that the potential exists and in this case in the absence of a protest hearing, will never be tested, investigated or determined. This ground is even more fertile in offshore racing when the closest competitor is over the horizon and out of sight, or even if in sight, the offence is hidden such as a liferaft case full of just air.

As a contributing rule maker I'm flabbergasted you can't recognise or appreciate the level frustration being expressed here. While the RSS regarding RC protests may or may not have changed in the intervening period, Rothmans was stripped of line honours in this race for flying a logo kite (their last left after blowing up the rest) out of sight of land or any competitor, yet this came from a RC protest where the RC was relying upon a 2nd hand observation. Exactly the same circumstances as this where the RC protested, but that is as far as it got.

Why you and presumably fellow contributing rule makers don't want to see, or can't see that the swamp needs draining, is difficult to comprehend. By sitting there with your quills up your collective arses leaves only one conclusion and that is you see something like this as questioning your rule making penmanship. In other words you are as conflicted as WOXI on this subject and like them quite happy with the status quo.            

That leaves places like this thread as one avenue for people to prosecute this subject and shame rule makers into draining the swamp. Glen if you don't like that then "ir a la mierda". 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

In simple terms; you can’t mandate or legislate honorable behavior. The feeble attempts to exonerate based on a chaotic, conflicting and constantly changing narrative are reprehensible chavsnistic tribalism. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Glenn McCarthy said:

5 International Judges have ruled.

thanxs Jack , I missed the above piece of bull shit .

There was NO ruling and that is exactly why we are in the position we are in .

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Fuck me said the fairy princess, after poking my head back in this thread after actually having a life elsewhere only to see the same shit over and over by the same attention seeking morons it’s not sailing that has problems. This crap is worse than Waterboarding 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, frant said:

MR claims that they were transmitting a very weak or null AIS signal but they were transmitting.

Therefore his (unspoken) claim is that the post race certificate is valid.

He Did Not admit that they did not comply to the rules. Ie his suggestion is that a very poor signal caused through no fault of there own and undetected ( and by implication leaving them in a position where the signal could not be rectified to normal levels)  was in compliance with the rule, and this could arguably be so.

frant you might need to rethink all that.

He did not say "they were transmitting a very weak or null AIS (TX) signal" during the race. This was either said or inferred in an interview over 3 days after the finish, not before making a post race declaration, but knowing there was a claim they were not transmitting. See his words "but we now believe our signal wasn't strong enough" That is not "then" but "subsequent" (at time of interview?), not "know" but "believe".

He says their AIS TX light was on, knows of the antenna cable/connection issues, but didn't look at the splitter TX light which is in proximity to the AIS and its TX light? A splitter containing 3 of the 6 connections in the cable he speaks of, the other 3 being at top and bottom of the mast and at AIS. This claim of no knowledge is creaking like a old rocking chair.         

"When you are on board the boat you've no idea whether you are actually transmitting or not. If the device says you are transmitting then you assume that you are sending a signal."

"We got everything rebooted and got everything going afterwards. We were receiving AIS, when you are receiving, you also believe that you are transmitting OK as well".

“The AIS had nothing to show that we weren't transmitting, and as far as we were concerned that was end of story. Our AIS was on for the whole of the race, " he reiterated.

"There is a light which shows on the AIS that you are transmitting, and ours was.The problem is, it is a VHF antenna, and I know from my experience in the powerboat building world, that if you don't have a perfect VHF connection, then the system becomes massively compromised".

"We believe our VHF splitter had been compromised through the video live-stream download before the start. We were receiving AIS information, but we now believe our signal wasn't strong enough to transmit with much range.

This is Pulitzer Prize not RRS territory.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/213456/Wild-Oats-XIs-skipper-answers-critics-on-S2H-row

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LionessRacing said:

In simple terms; you can’t mandate or legislate honorable behavior. The feeble attempts to exonerate based on a chaotic, conflicting and constantly changing narrative are reprehensible chavsnistic tribalism. 

You certainly can't, that is why God invented words like; police, prosecutor, defender, judge, jury, prison and buggery. However you can't have rules that allow less than honorable behavior to flourish, yet complain about that behavior. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, frant said:

Jack I have to doubt you comprehension skills. I said that they claimed that the big splitter fryup had caused a weak or null signal that they did not detect because the Tx light was flashing, or they had confirmation that they were Rx. “ The AIS had nothing to show that we were not transmitting”

Frant I was simply relying on you appearing to support their declaration being valid if he believed all this at the time of signing it. How can this be so when this belief arose or is constructed after signing it?  This is one of the reasons submission of declarations are time barred with big penaltys. Ask InfoTrack from last year

2 hours ago, frant said:

MR claims that they were transmitting a very weak or null AIS signal but they were transmitting.

Therefore his (unspoken) claim is that the post race certificate is valid.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, frant said:

Jack I have to doubt you comprehension skills. I said that they claimed that the big splitter fryup had caused a weak or null signal that they did not detect because the Tx light was flashing, or they had confirmation that they were Rx. “ The AIS had nothing to show that we were not transmitting” 

image.thumb.png.66e41d5a34ed4f80892e25f1cc1475d9.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, frant said:

As I say their version of events is now fact as no evidence can be put to the contrary as there is no further avenue for hearing

JHC but there's some crap written here .

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, frant said:

Jack I have to doubt you comprehension skills. I said that they claimed that the big splitter fryup had caused a weak or null signal that they did not detect because the Tx light was flashing, or they had confirmation that they were Rx. “ The AIS had nothing to show that we were not transmitting” 

Then after the fact We believe our VHF splitter had been compromised through the video live-stream download before the start. We were receiving AIS information, but we now believe our signal wasn't strong enough to transmit with much range..

This will never be tested under oath unless someone from WOXI comes out and says “we turned off Tx” that’s not going to happen so we have to live with the FACT that this version is true. Only recourse is a rule 69 for critism of RC and competitors.

It is not the only recourse at all. The RC could protest WO for submitting a false declaration.

Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

@Midis the OP, they are afforded a few privileges. The other guy should be waterboarded.

 

25 minutes ago, VOA said:

See post #2 this thread. Mid is a trolling attention seeker, loves to make shit fights

Fact is that all of the bleating on this board makes not one jot of difference. Just a whole lot of chest beating and virtue projecting. Anonomousely of course. 

Random could make his protest though. At this point I really do think it’s up to him to save yachting as we know it

. Post #2 for a OP, a one liner that is on Page 6 and over 500 posts proceed it? Fuck someone has low pain threshold

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, frant said:

Exactly MR  knows it to be true and has proven it to be true by his version of circumstantial evidence.

given that you can sit there and write such crap , you're consigned to the troll bin

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, frant said:

Probably after time limit and they would also have to prove that Tx was off or first have a hearing to adjudicate the level of Tx that fails to satisfy SI. 

I personally don’t believe the explanation but that really makes no difference in the grand scheme of things

No time limit

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

image.png.d7cc969ed7eb59a35180f42847567819.png

Scary shit, no GPS, no compass, no AIS.

Edit: I mean seriously, is that the kind of statement we expect from someone at that level?  It's almost unbelievable.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, random said:

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

image.png.d7cc969ed7eb59a35180f42847567819.png

Scary shit, no GPS, no compass, no AIS.

Edit: I mean seriously, is that the kind of statement we expect from someone at that level?  It's almost unbelievable.

 

It were a dark and stormy night, just don't bother about the 3/4 moon. YAAAARRRR

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, frant said:

If you as say chair of the RC put in a protest accusing MR of cheating then you could probably expect a defamation writ to arrive in the mail pretty shortly followed by which you could kiss your nice house goodbye

image.png.1adce56f66a4f3931f69024f9938ab50.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, frant said:

Further this would be very treacherous ground to tread. If you as say chair of the RC put in a protest accusing MR of cheating then you could probably expect a defamation writ to arrive in the mail pretty shortly followed by which you could kiss your nice house goodbye. I’m pretty sure that the onus of proof would then be on you to satisfy a court of law that the declaration was false. Ie your claim was true. How deep are your pockets? A few barristers would rub their hands at the prospect of putting you on trial while getting $10k a day from the Oatleys. 

That protest won’t eventuate.

 

The best thing about all this is that you aren't lawyer for the RC. Whew ! ! !

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

"Look I'm fucking paying you cunts a shit-load a day to hose this down, but you haven't"

"It's working, we are well placed to stop the posters in the next few days, we just need you to sign-off on the next stage of the contract"

"You have two days to make random and his mates STFU or you are out of here.  Got that?  Now piss-off and make it happen"

"OK will do"

"Start threatening the cunts with legal action if you have to!"

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, savoir said:

It is not the only recourse at all. The RC could protest WO for submitting a false declaration.

 

1 hour ago, frant said:

Probably after time limit and they would also have to prove that Tx was off or first have a hearing to adjudicate the level of Tx that fails to satisfy SI. 

I personally don’t believe the explanation but that really makes no difference in the grand scheme of things

 

1 hour ago, savoir said:

No time limit

 

1 hour ago, frant said:

What would the protest be for? A rule 69? You would have to prove that the declaration was false and also most critically prove that it was intentionally false when submitted. Unless you can prove Tx was off their very weak excuse for transmitting a weak signal would probably exonerate them. Just my opinion on the matter. Not supporting their cause.

 

55 minutes ago, frant said:

Further this would be very treacherous ground to tread. If you as say chair of the RC put in a protest accusing MR of cheating then you could probably expect a defamation writ to arrive in the mail pretty shortly followed by which you could kiss your nice house goodbye. I’m pretty sure that the onus of proof would then be on you to satisfy a court of law that the declaration was false. Ie your claim was true. How deep are your pockets? A few barristers would rub their hands at the prospect of putting you on trial while getting $10k a day from the Oatleys. 

That protest won’t eventuate.

Frant I'm  desperately wanting to believe you are not getting advice from Perry about the RRS. If so can you double check it is Mason not Como 

Perry Mason.jpg

Perry Como.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Everyone should chill out on the Rule 69 shit. I hope for Richards and Team WOXI's sake he comes clean as promised with regard to these two statements of his on or before Monday 7 January or in 4 days time.

"We can very clearly prove that we had our AIS on for the entire race. We can prove, and will confirm in a week's time, that we were compromised by live-streaming from the helicopter".

“We think the Race Committee should make a public apology to us. We have been accused of something which simply never happened', says a still irate Richards.

Putting aside the perplexing aspect that WOXI was presumably able to go to a IJ hearing (that never eventuated) with proof their AIS TX was on to now support a demand for an apology from the RC, yet one week after the race has finished still hasn't furnished that evidence to anyone. If he renegs on that promise he is going to be in a spot of bother after next Monday, at the very least in the court public opinion.

https://www.sail-world.com/news/213456/Wild-Oats-XIs-skipper-answers-critics-on-S2H-row

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

We can very clearly prove that we had our AIS on for the entire race.

On Tick , Tx ?

Now go back and read the rules ....................

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, random said:

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

image.png.d7cc969ed7eb59a35180f42847567819.png

Scary shit, no GPS, no compass, no AIS.

Edit: I mean seriously, is that the kind of statement we expect from someone at that level?  It's almost unbelievable.

just to get it on the next page

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Mid said:

world record time to fit a new splitter :rolleyes:

Not to mention identifying it as the issue.

 

 

 

3 hours ago, VOA said:

Ran dumb & Mid just trolling the board for bites. They see it as fun getting reactions, it’s what they do

And given your post # and dislike # that would make you a class A cunt.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

"Look I'm fucking paying you cunts a shit-load a day to hose this down, but you haven't"

"It's working, we are well placed to stop the posters in the next few days, we just need you to sign-off on the next stage of the contract"

"You have two days to make random and his mates STFU or you are out of here.  Got that?  Now piss-off and make it happen"

"OK will do"

"Start threatening the cunts with legal action if you have to!"

I never said nuffink yer honour.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, jack_sparrow said:

 

 

 

 

Frant I'm  desperately wanting to believe you are not getting advice from Perry about the RRS. If so can you double check it is Mason not Como 

Perry Mason.jpg

Perry Como.jpg

I so wish there was a laugh button in here.

  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, paps49 said:
4 hours ago, VOA said:

Ran dumb & Mid just trolling the board for bites. They see it as fun getting reactions, it’s what they do

And given your post # and dislike # that would make you a class A cunt.

tumblr_lesewbCi2J1qaqaiy.gif

  • Like 1
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, duncan (the other one) said:

its odd, but sometimes the moon doesn't rise at sunset.

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

image.png.d7cc969ed7eb59a35180f42847567819.png

Link to post
Share on other sites

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

 

They did no such thing, they skirted Tasman Light out wide unlike everyone else who could see each other but not WOXI via AIS, but WOXI could see them.

I think up until this point BJ and everyone else couldn't really give two fucks WOXI wasn't coming up on AIS as you have to sail your own race in a 600 miler that suits your boat. However at this point BJ got for the first time in the race conditions and a TWA/TWS fixed by a drag race to the finish not too far distant that suited the two RP's and not the fat pricks. My guess is they suddenly felt for the first time they were being fucked over by no AIS TX coming from WOXI.

At this point the two fat boys were dead and any bleating about AIS would be deemed bullshit by their peers. That is underpinned by their silence on the matter. BJ however totally different kettle of fish with Storm Bay and the Derwent going to shit.

Hypotheticaly if BJ hoisted the red hanky off Tasman Is Fridat morning in the dark, notified the RC by radio and then advised WOXI ashore, the outcome would have been the RC meeting with Wild Oats XI, done any necessary investigation, including stepping on board WOXI to examine their AIS/verify any statements etc and a Protest Hearing before the IJ would have occurred that afternoon.

Instead BJ hoisted no red hanky, stepped off onto mother earth and from Owner/Skipper/Tactician started crying to the media, yet did nothing else? It was left 12 hours with this bonfire brewing for the RC to lodge a protest Friday evening (that they and everyone with any understanding of the RRS knew would be deemed invalid by the IJ) with the IJ to be convened early afternoon the next day. Meanwhile Saturday WOXI along with any AIS evidence left to go home, along with some of the key players for a hearing of this nature, also leaving town. The IJ then declares the RC's protest not unexpectantly as invalid.

With this outcome and WOXI pretending no one will notice, the the wick on the online chatterati candle is lit.

They/we are now left to await Richard's promise of providing on or before next Monday being:  "We can very clearly prove that we had our AIS on for the entire race. We can prove, and will confirm in a week's time, that we were compromised by live-streaming from the helicopter".  This is in conjunction with a WOXI demand that the RC make WOXI a public apology and WOXI publicly stating the RC's SI's regarding AIS suck.

I have a lot of grey hair and heard lots of loser statements of that ilk. However I don't recall ever a winner going to print with such an extraordinary demand and criticism of a RO/RC. 

Who said sailing is like watching grass grow.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, random said:

"It was very tricky sailing on that last night. It was very dark and it was easy to get disorientated.  We just had to keep our boat going towards Tasman light. And that's what we did.""

image.png.d7cc969ed7eb59a35180f42847567819.png

Scary shit, no GPS, no compass, no AIS.

Edit: I mean seriously, is that the kind of statement we expect from someone at that level?  It's almost unbelievable.

 

3 hours ago, random said:

just to get it on the next page

 

 

2 hours ago, duncan (the other one) said:

its odd, but sometimes the moon doesn't rise at sunset.

And you keep posting away Randumb oblivious to what is posted here and with no interest to listening to further you cause. Like this hint from @duncan (the other one)  as direct reply to you ...It wasn't night., it was fucking early morning. You are gifted shit here but but still cant get it right. If you followed the race you would know that. Brain dead morons are now complaining about being being wrongly identified as you.   

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, woodruffkey said:

^^ YCMTSU.

So MR is going to take the "lid off the septic tank"  by next Monday and give it a good stir.

The Fanbois would have to be hoping that Oatley's Focus Group is putting in the long hours to

get the "Evidence" and I use that term very loosely,  arranged in a manner that does not contradict what the Master

of "Foot in Mouth" has already said.

Will the Master be trusted to deliver it?

Can't wait :)

 

Catch up mate.

That focus group inclusive of all WOXI players have already polished away and took over 3 days since the finish and over 2 days since the IJ decision (to veto the RC's protest) to come up with what Richards could and could not say to the media come Monday 31 December when he got home to Sydney. Some may say it was like polishing a turd.

You should then say to yourself who have WOXI distributed that polished turd to since releasing it on the afternoon of New Years Eve when the world goes to sleep? The answer over 3 days later now is no one on planet earth other than Richard Gladwell at Sail-World.com/nz

Why is that so? My personal opinion is while Gladwell can be a pain in the arse at times for things NZ centric, he is respected, is closer to the sport than many of his peers by personal contact with the players and just happens to have a rules fettish. My bet is his personal view is the villian in this piece is not WOXI,  but BJ by not protesting, which quite frankly is not far from the money for anyone objective having a understanding of the RRS re protests. That is why he has been presented by WOXI with the good oil as being the sole carrier at this point of the WOXI torch.

That said Gladwell is not silly enough to believe just the WOXI unsubstantiated message and has got WOXI on the hook for a WOXI come clean with evidence by next Monday. Very smart reporter. 

Watch this space. 

 https://www.sail-world.com/news/213456/Wild-Oats-XIs-skipper-answers-critics-on-S2H-row  

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, HILLY said:

 

If you play this sport long enough, (40 odd years), you will come to realise that certain clubs, officials, seem to favour particular boats / persons. 

 

or you get one fleet who tries to dominate the club, makes the other fleets feel insignificant, and then when people leave the club, wonder why membership is dwindling...

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

This was Burkes.first Hobart. Also the person more susceptible than anyone on board to instruction, particularly instruction that involved economy with the truth. Why no skipper and no navigator at the hearing everyone should ask?

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

This was Burkes.first Hobart. Also the person more susceptible than anyone on board to instruction, particularly instruction that involved economy with the truth. Why no skipper and no navigator at the hearing everyone should ask?

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

This was Burkes.first Hobart. Also the person more susceptible than anyone on board to instruction, particularly instruction that involved economy with the truth. Why no skipper and no navigator at the hearing everyone should ask?

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

This was Burkes.first Hobart. Also the person more susceptible than anyone on board to instruction, particularly instruction that involved economy with the truth. Why no skipper and no navigator at the hearing everyone should ask?

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, jack_sparrow said:

This was Burkes.first Hobart. Also the person more susceptible than anyone on board to instruction, particularly instruction that involved economy with the truth. Why no skipper and no navigator at the hearing everyone should ask?

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, frant said:

That is actually a very poor response. No dogs in National Parks is designed to protect native species from domestic animals, also I take it you carry your dogs shit out in a little plastic bag at the very least.

Some rules are  justifiable and penalties should be enforced otherwise would have a free for all and visible deterioration of parks for all others.

What we need is all you Labor voters to volunteer to come over here to Moreton island and follow the Dingos around picking up their turds. Of course unlike you I would never encourage the use of single use plastic bags. The head ranger is a nazi but being a lazy fat fuck she drives her great big 4x4 along the beach at exactly the same time every day so we have been sitting in our dinghys just of the beach with our dogs and encouraging them to bark at her as she drives past. Childish I know. I really should do something constructive with my holidays like endlessly arguing with people I don’t know, about a yacht race I didn’t do. 

Caught up with Sqwark a few days ago here and he certainly wasn’t wasting his time reading shit on the interwebs about the race and he came second over the line.

Again a huge congratulations to the MR and the crew of WOXI and to MB and the crew of BJ for almost getting them over the line.

Might be time for all you sad fucks to get on with your lives. The people who you dicks have wasted the last 6 days posting about have.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, mad said:

Because it’s generally accepted practice in law not to let your guilty client take the stand if at all possible. Especially if your client has a proven issue with keeping his mouth shut. 

You can say that again.

Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

What we need is all you Labor voters to volunteer to come over here to Moreton island and follow the Dingos around picking up their turds. Of course unlike you I would never encourage the use of single use plastic bags. The head ranger is a nazi but being a lazy fat fuck she drives her great big 4x4 along the beach at exactly the same time every day so we have been sitting in our dinghys just of the beach with our dogs and encouraging them to bark at her as she drives past. Childish I know. I really should do something constructive with my holidays like endlessly arguing with people I don’t know, about a yacht race I didn’t do. 

Caught up with Sqwark a few days ago here and he certainly wasn’t wasting his time reading shit on the interwebs about the race and he came second over the line.

Again a huge congratulations to the MR and the crew of WOXI and to MB and the crew of BJ for almost getting them over the line.

Might be time for all you sad fucks to get on with your lives. The people who you dicks have wasted the last 6 days posting about have.

 

That's awesome LB, You come in here just as the thread is dying anyway and suggest that we let it die, well timed.

There are those who only give a fuck about themselves, others have a broader view of things, at community level, at sport level even.  So you can see which group might be more interested in the rules of sailing being seen to be applied.  Others just shrug, collect the cheque or the mug and move on.

I have a broader view of the WOXI debacle.  The only positive to come out of it is that it has pulled into focus what a bad sportsman Mark Richards is.  His failure to act in the best interest of the Race or the Sport is there for all to see.  Self interest to the bitter end.

But your view is completely understandable, after all you have confessed to literally shitting on rules of our National Parks and bragging about it.  Disrespecting those who have jobs to enforce the rules.   Rules designed to protect the parks from hoards of selfish boat owners trashing the place.  So you have the same mind-set as Richards, it's all about what you want and 'Bugger the rest of you".

Time the take the dog in for a shit isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, random said:

Time the take the dog in for a shit isn't it?

Indeed it is. Maybe one year you could actually do a Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race? When you get there you could walk up to MR and call him a cheat to his face and repeat all the shit you have dribbled on hear. I doubt you have the stones to do either of those things. Get a life you poor sad cunt.

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Indeed it is. Maybe one year you could actually do a Sydney to Hobart Yacht Race? When you get there you could walk up to MR and call him a cheat to his face and repeat all the shit you have dribbled on hear. I doubt you have the stones to do either of those things. Get a life you poor sad cunt.

I've got a great life thanks LB.  I manage to enjoy it immensely without bragging about breaking National Laws.  Shitting on beaches that people travel from the other side of the planet to enjoy.  Nice work.

Rest assured I would have no difficulty expressing my views to Richards or anyone else in person on this.  But your response is a key indicator of rock-bottom of an argument both in SA and the real world, the old 'tell it to their faces' school yard taunt.  Maybe you should stop the female Ranger this morning and call her a "lazy fat fuck", if you have the stones.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, random said:

I've got a great life thanks LB.  I manage to enjoy it immensely without bragging about breaking National Laws.  Shitting on beaches that people travel from the other side of the planet to enjoy.  Nice work.

Rest assured I would have no difficulty expressing my views to Richards or anyone else in person on this.  But your response is a key indicator of rock-bottom of an argument both in SA and the real world, the old 'tell it to their faces' school yard taunt.  Maybe you should stop the female Ranger this morning and call her a "lazy fat fuck", if you have the stones.

 

He and his dog are building a turd wall to keep them all out.........

Link to post
Share on other sites

In loving memory of Clark and Daw

We welcome this evening Mr Richard the skipper of the winning power boat.

Hello Brian.

Mr Richard, may we call you Dick?

Sure Brian, most people do.

So you won the race again this year Dick.

Yep we did Brian, 10th time.

I thought it was 9?

Only because of that mongrel Ginger Megs!, It’s really 10, I count 10.

Yes Dick we will come to that later.

This year there seemed to be a problem with your AIS registration.

Not at all Brian registration with the Australian Institute of Sport not required this is a power boat race.

Dick I was referring to your safety equipment the AIS transmitter/receiver.

Oh that thing, it was turned on the whole time.

How do you know that Dick.

Don Juan told me, everyone heard him.

Did you at any point go and see for yourself?

Shit no Brian, Dons room stinks of garlic and Gitanes, no one goes in there.

Ok then but you say it was turned on but it was not transmitting?

Correct Brian, it got de coupled.

Surely you mean fried?

No Brian I know what I said, it was de coupled. Big Eon needed to microwave his pre start brunch so he pulled the plug.

I see and how did it get fixed so quickly in Hobart?

We re shoe’d it Brian.

Surely you mean re booted Dick?

I know what I said Brian, I’m getting a bit tired of you putting words in my mouth.

Ok then how did you fix it?

Well Brian a bunch of us were sculling Bubbles from our smelly shoes and got a bit tipsy. Don Juan went below to get his Gitanes, realised what must have happened and plugged it back in.

I see, and you got into some trouble last year too at the start did you not?

Not at all Brian, that uppity little prick Ginger Megs snuck up on us, no one knew he was there!

I see so what did you do Dick?

We blocked the little prick so he couldn’t get past Brian what a stupid question!

And what did he do Dick?

That’s obvious Brian he had to turn away sharply and go somewhere else.

And what might have happened if he had not done that Dick?

Most likely Brian his front would a fell off!

Thank you Mr Dick.

Always a pleasure Brian.

  • Like 15
  • Downvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites